四肢关节专用低场强MRI评估对膝关节损伤的诊断价值

目的：分析四肢关节专用低场强MRI诊断膝关节损伤的临床应用价值。 方法：于2004-12/2005-10解放军总医院全军骨科研究所收治经手术、关节镜检查或临床证实的膝关节损伤患者40例（43个膝关节）。应用Atorscan0.2T永磁型四肢关节专用低场强磁共振机,对膝关节损伤的MRI表现进行分析。 结果：四肢关节专用低场强MRI对半月板、前交叉韧带、骨挫伤等均可作出正确诊断。 结论：四肢关节专用低场强MRI对膝关节损伤的综合诊断具有重要意义,是膝关节损伤较理想的一种非创伤性检查方法。     

Does prophylactic sotalol and magnesium decrease the incidence of atrial fibrillation following coronary artery bypass surgery: a propensity-matched analysis

Background  

Atrial fibrillation can occur in up to 40% of patients undergoing coronary surgery.     

肌腱玻璃化法冷冻保存的体外实验

目的:目前临床上常用低温冷冻法来保存同种异体肌腱,但操作较复杂费时,并且所保存的肌腱活性较低而限制其应用。采用已筛选的玻璃化法冷冻保存鸡屈趾深肌腱,并将复温后的玻璃化肌腱进行体外检测,探索其作为肌腱移植材料的可行性。方法:实验于2003-11/2005-02在解放军总医院骨科研究所完成。①实验材料及分组:来亨鸡16只,雄性,体质量2.5kg左右,随机分为2组,玻璃化组为玻璃化肌腱,新鲜肌腱组为新鲜肌腱,每组8只。②实验过程:切取来亨鸡屈趾深肌腱,置入玻璃化液内快速投入液氮保存2周制备玻璃化肌腱。③实验评估:将2组肌腱在体外进行大体、组织学及超微结构观察,羟脯氨酸含量测定,生物力学性能检测,并对两组肌腱进行细胞培养与鉴定。结果:①玻璃化组肌腱的大体、组织学及超微结构与新鲜肌腱组相似,其细胞及细胞外结构得以良好保存。②应用碱解法测定玻璃化肌腱内的羟脯氨酸含量为69.27mg/g,与新鲜肌腱组间差异无统计学意义。③玻璃化组肌腱破裂强度为165.58MPa,弹性模量1.41GPa,与新鲜肌腱组的力学性能差异无统计学意义。④将玻璃化组肌腱进行细胞培养,细胞第8天自组织块长出,第21天后传代,培养3代后出现明显的退化现象,其生物学特性与新鲜肌腱组相似。⑤将两组肌腱培养的细胞分别进行免疫组织化学染色,经鉴定均为肌腱细胞。结论:玻璃化法保存的肌腱具有良好的细胞活性、细胞外结构及力学性能,其生物学及生物力学特性无明显变异。     

Retention of "safe" blood donors. The Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study

BACKGROUND: There are obvious advantages to increasing donor retention. However, for reasons of blood safety, certain donors may, in fact, be more desirable to retain than others. “Safe” donors are defined as those who provided a blood donation that was negative on all laboratory screening tests and who subsequently reported no behavioral risks in response to an anonymous survey. This study identifies the most important factors affecting the intention of “safe” donors to provide another donation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: An anonymous survey asking about donation history, sexual history, injecting drug use, and recent donation experience was mailed to 50,162 randomly selected allogeneic donors (including directed donors) who gave blood from April through July or from October through December 1993 at one of the five United States blood centers participating in the Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study. Before mailing, questionnaires were coded to designate donors with nonreactive laboratory screening tests at their most recent donation. RESULTS: A total of 34,726 donors (69%) responded, with substantially higher response among repeat donors. According to reported intentions only, the vast majority of “safe” donors indicated a high likelihood of donating again within the next 12 months. Only 3.4 percent reported a low likelihood of donating again. A comparison of those likely to return and those unlikely to return reveals significant differences in demographics and in ratings of the donation experience. A higher proportion of those unlikely to return were first-time donors, minority-group donors, and donors with less education. The highest projected loss among “safe” donors was seen for those who gave a fair to poor assessment of their treatment by blood center staff or of their physical well-being during or after donating. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that efforts to improve donors' perceptions of their donation experience, as well as attention to the physical effects of blood donation, may aid in the retention of both repeat and first-time donors.